Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

As was pointed out by someone, either in this thread or a similar one, it's small government democracy.

All the aides and "Sir Bernards" who would have previously drafted such legislation have been let go in the cause of cost saving. The corporations have stepped into the breach and provided lobbyists to plug the gap and to enable legislation to be drafted - it's hardly their fault if the lobbyists happen to have a particular point of view....

Sorry but this is bull ****. I know later you said it made you sad and I assume there is some sarcasm here. But it wouldn't matter one iota how many people on the government payroll were working on the bill, lobbyists writing bills has been going on for more than 4 decades, long before Trump. Sometimes staff write bills then go to work for the corporations that benefitted from the bills.

And keep in mind Congressional staff members are not the ones being let go. It's staff from government agencies that are not being appointed, vacancies not filled.

If you think this has anything at all to do with "small government" you don't know the history of how bills are currently written.

Anyone in the thread who needs a bit more on this outrageous practice, start here to educate yourselves: ALEC

Quote:

Funding
As of 2011, corporation, think tank, and trade group members accounted for almost 99% of ALEC's $7 million budget.[14] Legislators pay $100 in biennial membership dues, or $50 per year, while non-legislators pay $7,000 to $25,000 to join, and more to participate in the task forces.[5][12][65] In 2010, NPR reported that tax records showed that corporations had collectively paid as much as $6 million a year to ALEC.[127] ALEC's total revenue in 2011 was $9 million.[65]

The American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) describes itself as the largest “membership association of state legislators,” but over 98% of its revenue comes from sources other than legislative dues, primarily from corporations and corporate foundations.[1] After the 2010 congressional midterm elections, ALEC boasted that “among those who won their elections, three of the four former state legislators newly-elected to the U.S. Senate are ALEC Alumni and 27 of the 42 former state legislators newly-elected to the U.S. House are ALEC Alumni.” (A full list of the Congressional freshmen who are ALEC alums can be found here.) [2]
ALEC’s agenda extends into almost all areas of law. Its bills undermine environmental regulations and deny climate change; support school privatization; undercut health care reform; defund unions and limit their political influence; restrain legislatures’ abilities to raise revenue through taxes; mandate strict election laws that disenfranchise voters; increase incarceration to benefit the private prison industry, among many other issues. [3]
ALEC is an "associate" member of the State Policy Network, a web of right-wing “think tanks” in every state across the country.[4]...

ALEC is a corporate bill mill. It is not just a lobby or a front group; it is much more powerful than that. Through ALEC, corporations hand state legislators their wishlists to benefit their bottom line. Corporations fund almost all of ALEC's operations. They pay for a seat on ALEC task forces where corporate lobbyists and special interest reps vote with elected officials to approve “model” bills. Learn more at the Center for Media and Democracy's ALECexposed.org, and check out breaking news on our PRWatch.org site.

And ALEC just happens to be the biggest and most influential bill mill. A lot of bills are written by individual corporations and interest groups.

You may be right in the fact that the lobbyists are not necessarily at fault for representing certain interests.

However, we can blame the republicans [and Democrats] when they allow those lobbyists to provide input into legislation with little or no oversight.

ftfy

This is one case where Democratic legislators are just as complicit as are the Republicans. It just happens to be the Republicans passing this tax plan that is the sickest of the sick bills these lobby groups write.

Some see it but don't know what to do, or how to do it, or feel it's beyond their ability to fix.

Some see it, feel it's beyond fixing, and have felt hopeless about it long enough that they just don't care anymore.

I certainly have ideas on how to fix it. But as I'm not a politician, or very rich, there really is very little I can do about it. I certainly care... but at times I have to step back from politics such as this, and just avoid discussing it with certain family members or risk giving myself an aneurysm.

One other group of people: those that think its fine: money is speech. Or a subset: its not fine but government regulations are worse.

I thought the "cleaner tax code" goal was only supposed to apply to individual income tax, not corporate taxes.

Yup.

Thing is, there may be a benefit to allowing deductions... for example, allowing write-offs for capital expenses might cause a company to buy equipment (thus providing spin-off jobs in the economy). If the tax rate and the alternative minimal tax are the same, and a company can't benefit from deducting capital costs, then they will have less incentive to buy new equipment and will make due with the old stuff. This will reduce at least some of the supposed economic benefit of the tax cut.

There's already a deduction for capital expenses. It's called "reporting less profit."

From: https://poll.qu.edu/national/release...ReleaseID=2504The Republican tax plan pending in the U.S. Congress benefits the wealthy the most, 64 percent of American voters say, while 24 percent say the tax plan benefits the middle class and 5 percent say it benefits low-income people, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

American voters disapprove of the tax plan 53 - 29 percent

The poll also finds that:
- 41% of americans think the tax bill will increase taxes (compared to 20% who think there will be a reduction)
- It does point out that support for the tax plan is higher with Republican voters (67%), but it is far from universal
- The poll also points to very low approval ratings for Donald Trump, and for Republican handling of health care

There are other polls that show similar dislike for the Republican tax bill.

I wonder if polls like this might cause a few senators to change their minds when it comes time to vote on reconciliation. (Kind of like the way McCain voted with the republicans early in the health care debate, but voted against it in the end.) They could use the excuse that "The merged house and senate bills aren't what we originally voted for". And the Republican leadership would actually be grateful in private (thanks for killing an unpopular bill), while at the same time criticizing the republican senators that voted against it in public, and telling their donors "See? We tried! It was just a couple of hold outs! Give us more money for the next election".

From: https://poll.qu.edu/national/release...ReleaseID=2504The Republican tax plan pending in the U.S. Congress benefits the wealthy the most, 64 percent of American voters say, while 24 percent say the tax plan benefits the middle class and 5 percent say it benefits low-income people, according to a Quinnipiac University national poll released today.

American voters disapprove of the tax plan 53 - 29 percent

The poll also finds that:
- 41% of americans think the tax bill will increase taxes (compared to 20% who think there will be a reduction)
- It does point out that support for the tax plan is higher with Republican voters (67%), but it is far from universal
- The poll also points to very low approval ratings for Donald Trump, and for Republican handling of health care

There are other polls that show similar dislike for the Republican tax bill.

I wonder if polls like this might cause a few senators to change their minds when it comes time to vote on reconciliation. (Kind of like the way McCain voted with the republicans early in the health care debate, but voted against it in the end.) They could use the excuse that "The merged house and senate bills aren't what we originally voted for". And the Republican leadership would actually be grateful in private (thanks for killing an unpopular bill), while at the same time criticizing the republican senators that voted against it in public, and telling their donors "See? We tried! It was just a couple of hold outs! Give us more money for the next election".

All that matters to a Rep or Senator is the polling in their district/state.

All that matters to a Rep or Senator is the polling in their district/state.

I wouldn't say that that is all that matters... after all, they would probably prefer a Republican president to a democrat.

I do agree that their local polling is more important than national. But if the national numbers are that bad, you would assume that local numbers would also be bad in at least some areas. And while a state like Alabama is to intellectually backwards to consider voting Democrat, there are other Republican senators in more moderate states (Maine, Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania) who might see the republican tax bill as an albatross.

They don't care about polls because they have elections nicely rigged.

__________________All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine

I wouldn't say that that is all that matters... after all, they would probably prefer a Republican president to a democrat.

Maybe not. If he's a Republican they have to put up or shut up. Witness health care; they got to piss and moan about it, having no plan at all, for 8 years. Same with taxes: That mean Democrat in the Oval Office is thwarting our attempt to make a heroic tax cut.

Originally Posted by Segnosaur

And while a state like Alabama is to intellectually backwards to consider voting Democrat, there are other Republican senators in more moderate states (Maine, Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania) who might see the republican tax bill as an albatross.

This is one case where Democratic legislators are just as complicit as are the Republicans. It just happens to be the Republicans passing this tax plan that is the sickest of the sick bills these lobby groups write.

I mostly agree, but the ALEC-written bills to enrich for-profit prisons *might* actually be even sicker.

Some see it but don't know what to do, or how to do it, or feel it's beyond their ability to fix.

Some see it, feel it's beyond fixing, and have felt hopeless about it long enough that they just don't care anymore.

And then there was George Carlin, who just looked at it like “When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat” and found our country's and species' self-destruction genuinely amusing.

"Ghosts" implies some are deceased. The article doesn't say that. Still slimy, of course. You get that way in the swamp.

I think it refers to the one that the article's author could not find:

Quote:

One might not even exist.

One of the signatories, Gil Sylvia of the University of Georgia, does not have a biography page or any online trace of employment at the university. A university representative told The Intercept that no one with the name Gil Sylvia is employed there. There is a Gil Sylvia working as a marine resource economist at Oregon State University. He did not respond to a request for comment. (If you are the Gil Sylvia who signed this letter and exist, email me.)

__________________"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf

And while a state like Alabama is to intellectually backwards to consider voting Democrat, there are other Republican senators in more moderate states (Maine, Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania) who might see the republican tax bill as an albatross.

Calling the whole state stupid is maybe a tad counterproductive.

How is it "counterproductive"? How could it in any way make the situation worse? Do you think that they will be even LESS likely to vote rationally next time around?

This is a state that voted for Trump the last year. This year, they seem to have doubled down on their stupidity, since Roy Moore is actually leading in the polls. All this love for the Republicans, despite the fact that it is against their interests... Trump was a con-man who promised who was going to trash many social programs (despite the fact that Alabama is a poorer state and probably needs it more than many). Moore seems to have troubles understanding the law, and will be marginalized (at least for a short period of time) if he gets to the Senate.

I'm sure there may be some people from Alabama who aren't racist fans of child molesters. I am assuming anyone like that reading my post would look at it and say "Yup, we're voting stupid and deserve this ridicule".

This is from a week ago, but I just found it and it's hilarious. Robert Murray, the coal magnate who forced employees to take time without pay to attend Trump rallies, says the tax bill will wipe him out. Awwww.

I'm sure there may be some people from Alabama who aren't racist fans of child molesters. I am assuming anyone like that reading my post would look at it and say "Yup, we're voting stupid and deserve this ridicule".

Details:
- Top individual tax rate will be 37%, which is lower than the top tax rate in either the house or senate bill
- Corporate tax rate will be 21%, higher than the planned 20%
- Elimination of the Alternate Minimum Tax

Voting could start on Monday.

The democrats have asked the vote to be delayed until newly-elected senator Jones could be seated, but of course the Republicans have said no, they want to rush things through with as little oversight as possible.

2 republicans have expressed concerns: Collins doesn't like the decrease in the top tax rate, Rubio doesn't like raising the corporate tax rate above 20%. I guess the question is whether those concerns would be enough for them to vote against the bill.

This is from a week ago, but I just found it and it's hilarious. Robert Murray, the coal magnate who forced employees to take time without pay to attend Trump rallies, says the tax bill will wipe him out. Awwww.

You're assuming he is being honest about that. After all, it could just be a ploy in order to either 1) get sympathy in order to obtain more concessions, or 2) a ploy to help Trump by acting as a lightning rod (i.e. he knows he's unpopular, so claiming the bill will hurt him means that Trump can say "look, the bill isn't just for the fat cats")

Either way, it may be irrelevant. Your article says that one of his complaints is that they are keeping the Alternative Minimum tax, but the latest attempts to combine the house and senate bills have the minimum tax removed.

They don't care about polls because they have elections nicely rigged.

Jones' election surely will impact that comfort.

But I think these guys are oblivious to reality. Maybe they believe the economy will do so well they'll be able to say, 'we told you so'. Or they might have some other fantasy where they will be vindicated so it's fine to ignore the polls.

What's most concerning is that 100% of them are going along with the magical thinking.

But I think these guys are oblivious to reality. Maybe they believe the economy will do so well they'll be able to say, 'we told you so'. Or they might have some other fantasy where they will be vindicated so it's fine to ignore the polls.

What's most concerning is that 100% of them are going along with the magical thinking.

I think you guys are looking at this the wrong way.

They can't afford to worry about the ramifications on future elections when what they're doing is working to fulfill the promises made to those who put them in office in the first place. Not voters. Donors.

Details:
- Top individual tax rate will be 37%, which is lower than the top tax rate in either the house or senate bill
- Corporate tax rate will be 21%, higher than the planned 20%
- Elimination of the Alternate Minimum Tax

Voting could start on Monday.

The democrats have asked the vote to be delayed until newly-elected senator Jones could be seated, but of course the Republicans have said no, they want to rush things through with as little oversight as possible.

2 republicans have expressed concerns: Collins doesn't like the decrease in the top tax rate, Rubio doesn't like raising the corporate tax rate above 20%. I guess the question is whether those concerns would be enough for them to vote against the bill.

This is from a week ago, but I just found it and it's hilarious. Robert Murray, the coal magnate who forced employees to take time without pay to attend Trump rallies, says the tax bill will wipe him out. Awwww.

One might almost get the impression this hasn't been fully thought through ...

__________________It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150

Details:
- Top individual tax rate will be 37%, which is lower than the top tax rate in either the house or senate bill
- Corporate tax rate will be 21%, higher than the planned 20%
- Elimination of the Alternate Minimum Tax

Voting could start on Monday.

The democrats have asked the vote to be delayed until newly-elected senator Jones could be seated, but of course the Republicans have said no, they want to rush things through with as little oversight as possible.

2 republicans have expressed concerns: Collins doesn't like the decrease in the top tax rate, Rubio doesn't like raising the corporate tax rate above 20%. I guess the question is whether those concerns would be enough for them to vote against the bill.

I presumat that even though he will not be seated until 2018, the election of Jones dramatically enhances the leverage of Collins and/or Rubio. "Give in to our requests now or we may be able to delay the tax bill until next year, when you will have to deal with a 51/49 split."

What happens with the deductibility of Graduate student tuition waivers?

This is a major issue where I work and for me personally (I have a son with a tuition waver).

I don't know if they are consciously keeping it secret or if this issue is just not being paid much attention as the parts of the bill that will effect much larger interest groups are being rushed through.

I am not saying that this tax on tuition wavers will not have a dramatic impact on the country- I see it as a major attack on access to education and if passed it will severely damage future scientific and technological progress in the USA. But the students and families affected are quite powerless compared to the many wealthy organizations trying to rig the tax bill in their favor. Probably many of the legislators working on consolidating the House and Senate bills are not even that aware of this proviso. They will leave it to their staffs.

Sanders gave a decent opening supporting the POV I generally believe in. Tax cuts for the rich so the GOP can come back later and based on the growing deficit cut Medicare, Social Security and Medicaid.

It was followed by Republican Peter Roskam who presented the ideological difference, he called his view of social safety net built into the tax structure as the economics of envy. What an ass! But it's the view a lot of right wingers have, that somehow they'll be rich one day so tax cuts for the rich on the backs of the poor and middle class, yippee.

At least that was right to the point.

Another committee member spoke up repeating several times about her being a farmer and for small business. Her name was Kristi Noem. I looked her up.

She whined (earlier) about how the estate tax was a huge burden to her family and they had to take out a loan to pay the tax when her father died. Here's the Wiki entry:

Quote:

Noem has said that upon her father's 1994 death she and her family members decided to take out a loan to pay taxes owing on the estate, noting that "for 10 years that loan really impacted our ability to make a profit".[6] The property, of which Noem's family owns a non-controlling partnership in, has also received $3,058,152 in USDA farm subsidies from 1995 through 2009.[7] Over the years, Noem added a hunting lodge and restaurant to the property, and all of her siblings have moved back to assist in expanding the businesses.[3]

So 3+ million in farm subsidies over 15 years, they added a hunting lodge and restaurant while they were struggling with the loan to pay the estate tax?

Estate taxes are on capital gains that had not previously been taxed. Daddy's farm goes from a million dollars to 10 million and the kids inherit a farm worth 10 million. They complain at having to pay tax on the capital gains. Yet here is a whining Congresswoman claiming how hard paying a loan to pay that tax was on her family.

What bull ****. Her family owns a huge corporate farm, it's not some little family farm. It's not a small business and they obviously had no problem paying the estate tax.

The committee hearing is quite the scam, no one has seen the final bill, the committee chairman cuts off all discussion.

Now there's an idiot Republican on telling the Democrats to shut the **** up. Rep Don Young from AK. Between Young and Murkowski they are obviously pleased at the expanding oil drilling deal they got for AK.

Portman is on now telling everyone the middle class is getting the tax cut.

Last time I checked, I'm not Jones, nor am I associated in any way with the Democratic party in Alabama or any other state. I'm not even Amurican.

I would not advise Jones or anyone else in an official capacity to call the general Alabama voters. But, Alabama voters should have an idea about how their politics and social systems can make them look bad to the rest of the country, and part of that is calling them out when they make stupid decisions.

Now, fortunately by selecting Jones, on average they were smart and showed that they can make a responsible decision when voting for senators. I do reserve the right to continually point out that the Roy Moore/Donald Trump voter base in Alabama continues to be a bunch of backwards thinking, immoral, hypocritical fools.

The article does point out that respondents might like individual portions of the bill (i.e. increase in personal deductions and child tax credits; cutting Obamacare mandate) but really dislike the cuts to corporate taxes.

So the bill isn't completely out of the woods yet. As of late Thursday:

- Rubio wants an increase in child tax credits.
- Corker voted against the initial bill due to deficit concerns, so he may vote against it again
- Flake has both deficit concerns, and concerns about the timing of some of the provisions
- Collins has concerns about its impact on health care
- McCain and Cochran have both had recent health issues, so there is a small chance that one or both might miss the vote.

I do have to wonder how significant each of their concerns is, and what their rational is. For example, Rubio says he wants more money for the child tax credit, but its possible he is looking at just how unpopular the bill is, and realizes that it will harm the republican 'brand' if it goes through. So, he's trying to find some reason to vote against it, and "think of the children" would be a politically popular reason.

Pffft. Do you really think he has some special interest in the child tax credit? Rubio is still goal oriented toward becoming POTUS. He wants something that looks good on his record, child tax credits aren't a turn off for Republicans like entitlements are.

It looks like he got his concession.

With the vote this tight, I'm surprised more of the GOP legislators aren't holding the bill hostage for their pet pork-barrel servings.

Pffft. Do you really think he has some special interest in the child tax credit? Rubio is still goal oriented toward becoming POTUS. He wants something that looks good on his record, child tax credits aren't a turn off for Republicans like entitlements are.

No I don't think he cares about the issue. He was grand standing but I was hoping that meeting his demand would piss off some of the deficit hawks or push the bill ever closer to the price threshold. Oh well.

No I don't think he cares about the issue. He was grand standing but I was hoping that meeting his demand would piss off some of the deficit hawks or push the bill ever closer to the price threshold. Oh well.

Definitely grandstanding.

Don't think they care about the deficit if the plan is to let it soar then demand entitlements reform next.

Edited to add: and then Rubio kissed Ivanka's ass in a Tweet about this.

So the bill isn't completely out of the woods yet. As of late Thursday:

- Rubio wants an increase in child tax credits.
- Corker voted against the initial bill due to deficit concerns, so he may vote against it again
- Flake has both deficit concerns, and concerns about the timing of some of the provisions
- Collins has concerns about its impact on health care
- McCain and Cochran have both had recent health issues, so there is a small chance that one or both might miss the vote.

I do have to wonder how significant each of their concerns is, and what their rational is. For example, Rubio says he wants more money for the child tax credit, but its possible he is looking at just how unpopular the bill is, and realizes that it will harm the republican 'brand' if it goes through. So, he's trying to find some reason to vote against it, and "think of the children" would be a politically popular reason.

Didn't we already go through something similar in the first Senate version, where some "holdouts" got enough of a CYA concession to vote with the herd? Or was that some other bait-and-switch scam? It's all running together...

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.